Sabres Lines September 23

[Taro T]

8 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

Sobotka playing 4th line 23th man isn’t the end of the world. New coach may fix some of his problems. 

 

But if people are mad mad because he’s in the way of Asplund then they’re out to pasture. Asplund still is a couple years away on his own. 

If Sobotka is the answer, somebody asked the wrong ####in question. 

There is NO room for him on any of the top 3 lines and even on the 4th line, I would prefer to see at least 4 other guys & possibly more.  Okposo worked well in that role and hasn't noticably gotten any slower, so he should still be OK.  Wilson brings a physicality there that Sobotka lacks.  And Thompson could be useful on the 2PP, though they couldn't use that line as a true shutdown line with him there.  Let CJ Smith see if he can produce any more in a still limited role than he did in the past.  Asplund can at least grow in that role (though would likely be better served getting 20 minutes a night in Ra-cha-cha).  Any of which has some sort of positive more than just being able to win face off but essentially be playing without a stick after the draw.

[LGR4GM]

5 minutes ago, Taro T said:

If Sobotka is the answer, somebody asked the wrong ####in question. 

There is NO room for him on any of the top 3 lines and even on the 4th line, I would prefer to see at least 4 other guys & possibly more.  Okposo worked well in that role and hasn't noticably gotten any slower, so he should still be OK.  Wilson brings a physicality there that Sobotka lacks.  And Thompson could be useful on the 2PP, though they couldn't use that line as a true shutdown line with him there.  Let CJ Smith see if he can produce any more in a still limited role than he did in the past.  Asplund can at least grow in that role (though would likely be better served getting 20 minutes a night in Ra-cha-cha).  Any of which has some sort of positive more than just being able to win face off but essentially be playing without a stick after the draw.

All of this. 

[TrueBlueGED]

@Taro T and @LGR4GM agree, time to stock up on canned goods. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

@Taro T and @LGR4GM agree, time to stock up on canned goods. 

Sheesh.  You make it seem like the Liger is never right.  He is sometimes. ?

(Just joshin' ya, Liger. ? )

[Randall Flagg]

Taro's right. Like, it's not the greatest disaster to ever strike an NHL roster. It's not playing Matt D'Agostini at 2C, or Erik Burgdoerfer (was that real or a fever dream?) in the top 6. 

But this team has rarely been bad because of one colossal roster mishap. It's death by a thousand cuts. Lots of things go a little wrong very consistently. Sobotka's presence on the team as a mediocre ES defender that's bottom of the barrel at generating any offense was a big cut, and would again be a big cut, no matter which line that package of effects is on. There's literally no need for it, for a team that can send all relevant prospects down to their respective development locations and still field 12 forwards better than him.

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

Allowing Vlad to be in the lineup this season, especially in the context of our milquetoast offseason, would just demonstrate that Jason fundamentally misses the mark on what his team's major problem is. It would be both bad for the on-ice performance of the team and as a symbol of the competence of our pro hockey evaluation abilities, which have been in dubious standing for Botterill's entire tenure.

No qualms with the idea of Mitts to Rochester.

I am pretty sure that it'll be up to Kreuger and not JBot. I can't see JBot telling Kreuger he has to play him to not make the ROR trade even worse (?)   

If we have a better player I am sure that is the player who will play. JBot might have a hand in deciding where Mitts or another young guy ends up, but not Vlad. If he doesn't want him in Rochester he will sit if Kreuger doesn't find a role for him. Kreuger will simply have to answer for our win loss record.

As for the magic dust you mentioned in the full post I'm simply willing to wait to see if Kreuger has any (I think he might) and I'm not going to make all my assessments and judgements based on last year and Housley hockey. There are lots of examples of cast offs from one team making it on another, with a different coach, a different system, a different role. I'm simply willing to trust in Kreuger and wait to see what happens. 

I certainly don't expect Vlad to lead the team in scoring, but I do believe he will be better and find his place in a proper, limited role.  I also think Scandella will also do the same and be a decent 5/6 guy. I could be dreaming, but its the best way to approach a new season imo. Optimism. 

[Doohicksie]

Play Sobotka.  I don't care.

 

I don't care who's on the roster.  Just win. 

[Andrew Amerk]

If Ralph has magic dust, I’d rather it be used on Okposo than Vlad. 

Also, Malkin makes 9.5 and plays second line. 

[Randall Flagg]

20 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I am pretty sure that it'll be up to Kreuger and not JBot. I can't see JBot telling Kreuger he has to play him to not make the ROR trade even worse (?)   

If we have a better player I am sure that is the player who will play. JBot might have a hand in deciding where Mitts or another young guy ends up, but not Vlad. If he doesn't want him in Rochester he will sit if Kreuger doesn't find a role for him. Kreuger will simply have to answer for our win loss record.

As for the magic dust you mentioned in the full post I'm simply willing to wait to see if Kreuger has any (I think he might) and I'm not going to make all my assessments and judgements based on last year and Housley hockey. There are lots of examples of cast offs from one team making it on another, with a different coach, a different system, a different role. I'm simply willing to trust in Kreuger and wait to see what happens. 

I certainly don't expect Vlad to lead the team in scoring, but I do believe he will be better and find his place in a proper, limited role.  I also think Scandella will also do the same and be a decent 5/6 guy. I could be dreaming, but its the best way to approach a new season imo. Optimism. 

The last coaching staff literally did exactly what you described, and boasted about doing it, for the exact reasons you described. It led to a last place finish, and doing things like using Moulson in a depth scoring role to the tune of zero points in 15 games before catching on, throwing our season down the drain before it ever got started. 

There's nothing particular to the brand of hockey Housley coached that turned Sobotka into a bottom 3-5 skater out of the ~700 to play last year, which his teammates were somehow impervious to. 

20 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Play Sobotka.  I don't care.

 

I don't care who's on the roster.  Just win. 

If your purpose is the second bold, then you absolutely should care about the first bold.

[DarthEbriate]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

Taro's right. Like, it's not the greatest disaster to ever strike an NHL roster. It's not playing Matt D'Agostini at 2C, or Erik Burgdoerfer (was that real or a fever dream?) in the top 6.

I promise you you won't die in childbirth! It wasn't a fever dream.

But it also wasn't a planned fever dream either. This is an actual 12/5/2016 defense pairing lineup: McCabe - Risto / Guhle - Franson / Falk - Burgdoerfer.

However, the following Sabres were out: Bogosian, Kulikov, Gorges, Fedun. So, it's not like the Burg was slotted top 6 to start the year.

[DarthEbriate]

43 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Play Sobotka.  I don't care.

 

I don't care who's on the roster.  Just win. 

I care.

[Mustache of God]

8 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

I care.

I also care. Sobotka isn't getting better, he's regressing. I'd rather see a younger kid who needs NHL experience to get better fill his role.

[Doohicksie]

48 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

If your purpose is the second bold, then you absolutely should care about the first bold.

I get what you mean, but if RFK can field a strong lineup and Vlad happens to be on it, I don't F-ing care.

[Randall Flagg]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

I get what you mean, but if RFK can field a strong lineup and Vlad happens to be on it, I don't F-ing care.

If he can do that, then he can and should make it better with a different player in over Vlad 

Extremize your roster 

Edited September 24, 2019 by Randall Flagg

[Doohicksie]

Moreso than any of the previous coaches, I think this edition of the Sabres will be based on "clean slate" selection. 

Having said that, if Vlad makes the team but doesn't pull his weight I also think the slate will tell the story and he won't last long.

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Doohickie said:

I get what you mean, but if RFK can field a strong lineup and Vlad happens to be on it, I don't F-ing care.

IF Sobotka happens, you should care because the Sabres will have started (continued) giving weight to pedigree and (long) past performance over what players are doing today.  Krueger will have given a bad hockey player preference over less bad, or depending upon just where he ends up actual reasonable, hockey players for no reason other than he can win face offs against AHLers.  That isn't enough of a reason to try to accidentally tank your season

[Randall Flagg]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

Moreso than any of the previous coaches, I think this edition of the Sabres will be based on "clean slate" selection. 

Having said that, if Vlad makes the team but doesn't pull his weight I also think the slate will tell the story and he won't last long.

Is this statement made with the knowledge that Phil deliberately eschewed watching tape of any of our players under Bylsma? You think RK is going to go another level further than that? 

[Doohicksie]

In short:  Yes.

I think yeah, sure, he's watching tape, but the players that respond to his system, his motivation, his usage, and produce will get playing time over those who don't.  If Vlad is one of those guys, he plays.  I'm not saying he will be, mind you, but if he is and he does what RFK needs him to do and helps the team succeed, I'm find with that.

15 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Krueger will have given a bad hockey player preference over less bad

But what if, under RFK, Vlad is good?

[Taro T]

40 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

In short:  Yes.

I think yeah, sure, he's watching tape, but the players that respond to his system, his motivation, his usage, and produce will get playing time over those who don't.  If Vlad is one of those guys, he plays.  I'm not saying he will be, mind you, but if he is and he does what RFK needs him to do and helps the team succeed, I'm find with that.

But what if, under RFK, Vlad is good?

What if Matt ####ing Moulson might be good?  They are TOTALLY missing out on a guy that was expected to be Eichel's winger.  Maybe the ###### player whisperer could totally make him a hockey player again.

What have you seen from Sobotka, other than having an ability to normally win face offs, that says there is ANY ####ing possibility that he can play NHL hockey at even a 4th liner NHL level?

Was it his ability to kill scoring chances for the good guys against primarily AHLers and bad 4th liners?  'Cause that's the only thing he did besides win face offs.  Well, he did manage to shovel a couple of rebounds along the ice right back into Anderson as well, which is nice (not).

Your belief that Sobotka won't suck is as grounded in reality that Moulson wouldn't were he brought back.

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

The last coaching staff literally did exactly what you described, and boasted about doing it, for the exact reasons you described. It led to a last place finish, and doing things like using Moulson in a depth scoring role to the tune of zero points in 15 games before catching on, throwing our season down the drain before it ever got started. 

There's nothing particular to the brand of hockey Housley coached that turned Sobotka into a bottom 3-5 skater out of the ~700 to play last year, which his teammates were somehow impervious to. 

 

Housley talked about a lot of things but all he managed to do was create a lot of confusion along with a D that had little or no idea what they were doing or where they supposed to be. I don't really see the comparison to Moulson unless you are saying people come to Buffalo, drink the water, and then suck for the rest of their time there........that it?  Moulson should have scored in that role that was his job. I have no idea why he tanked so badly. Sure, it's obvious Tavares made him better than he was, but he still should have played better than he did in Buffalo. Guess he just quit.

If you are looking for Sobodka to score a lot you're looking for the wrong thing. That's not him, never has been. BUT, in a proper defensive system where players play their positions and do their jobs. Where we backcheck, and D plays D (in organized pairings), in that type of system, Sobodka MIGHT still be able to be a defensively solid forward and penalty killer.

Might not work, wait and see, but he used to be a good defensive player and I think he could be that again. Not everything is, or should be, about scoring. I expect Kreuger to bring our GA down by a lot. That's my hope anyway.

[PerreaultForever]

8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Your belief that Sobotka won't suck is as grounded in reality that Moulson wouldn't were he brought back.

My own view is wait and see before judging. I personally have no problems with a better player taking his spot, but he has to be better. Give me the best 12 forwards, the best 4 lines for their assigned roles, the best chemistry they can find between players, and let them show us what they can do. If that's Sobodka I have no problem with it. If it's someone else, great. As long as we compete and hopefully win.

[MODO Hockey]

14 hours ago, pi2000 said:

You dont pay him $9m and then put him on the second line.

What is this comment? 
John Tavares and Mitch Marner for example, makes 2 million more than Skinner and they play second line. 

Ofcourse they put him on the second line if that is his best fit for your team, you pay him 9 mill to score goals no matter what line he plays, you just make sure you give him the tools for it and thats it.

 

[Doohicksie]

5 hours ago, Taro T said:

Your belief that Sobotka won't suck

I have no belief that Sobotka won't suck.  I fully expect him to suck.  I'm just saying that if he doesn't suck I don't have a problem with RFK playing him.

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

My own view is wait and see before judging.

This.

Edited September 24, 2019 by Doohickie

[Taro T]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

My own view is wait and see before judging. I personally have no problems with a better player taking his spot, but he has to be better. Give me the best 12 forwards, the best 4 lines for their assigned roles, the best chemistry they can find between players, and let them show us what they can do. If that's Sobodka I have no problem with it. If it's someone else, great. As long as we compete and hopefully win.

Except, we've seen.  There are objectively more than 12 forwards on the team that are better than Sobotka.  There are probably street free agents that are better than Sobotka.

If he ends up in the opening night lineup, there had better be a massive case of food poisoning through the forward ranks; because that's the only way to justify it.

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

I have no belief that Sobotka won't suck.  I fully expect him to suck.  I'm just saying that if he doesn't suck I don't have a problem with RFK playing him.

This.

And, if Moulson doesn't suck, we shouldn't have an issue with Botterill bringing him back and Krueger playing him.   But yet we do know that Moulson would suck. 

And we have seen Sobotka this preseason; Joe Yerdon's comment not withstanding, he did not earn a spot on Friday.  Not sure why people expect Krueger to be the lousy player whisperer.

[Doohicksie]

Your strawman of Moulson coming back is just absurd. 

And again, I'm not "expecting" anything.  I simply think that Krueger will fill the available roster spots based on what he sees, not what he's been told.